Guess Who
By Montag | Related entries in General Politics, Quotes, ReligionGuess who had the following to say about Bush’s suggestion that intelligent design should be taught in school:
- “I think I would probably tailor that a little more than what the president has suggested… I’m not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom.”
- “What we should be teaching are the problems and holes — and I think there are legitimate problems and holes — in the theory of evolution. What we need to do is to present those fairly, from a scientific point of view[.]“
- “As far as intelligent design is concerned, I really don’t believe it has risen to the level of a scientific theory at this point that we would want to teach it alongside of evolution.”
Hey, makes perfect sense. Who is it that said such sensible things?
The quotes are from “possible 2008 presidential contender” Rick Santorum: the same mind that blames the Catholic church sex abuse scandal on liberalism. (Not that the two ideas are mutually exclusive.)
Is this Frist-like political maneuvering ahead of 2008? Won’t it be hard for Santorum to move toward the middle — as all the hip Presidential hopefuls seem to be doing — with stuff like the latter out there on the record?
Reuters: Leading Republican differs with Bush on evolution
This entry was posted on Friday, August 5th, 2005 and is filed under General Politics, Quotes, Religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 5th, 2005 at 11:09 am
Actually, since equality appears to have lower priority for Sen. Santorum than either liberty or order, his doubts about introducing “intelligent design” in classrooms are not so strange. “Intelligent design” and evolutionary theory are not equally developed, and therefore should not be given equal attention, in his view.
Also one must consider his religious affliation. Santorum is a Roman Catholic; in the _Pastoral Constitution of the Church in teh Modern World: Gaudium et spes_ it says the following in section 36.1:
“if methodical investigation within every branch of learning is carried out in a genuinely scientific manner and in accord with moral norms, it never truly conflicts with faith, for earthly matters and the concerns of faith derive from the same God. Indeed whoever labors to penetrate the secrets of reality with a humble and steady mind, even though he is unaware of the fact, is nevertheless being led by the hand of God, who holds all things in existence, and gives them their identity. Consequently, we cannot but deplore certain habits of mind, which are sometimes found too among Christians, which do not sufficiently attend to the rightful independence of science and which, from the arguments and controversies they spark, lead many minds to conclude that faith and science are mutually opposed.”
I thought about putting in a link, but the URL is a bit cumbersome. If you Google “Gaudium et spes” (in quotes) it’ll be the first hit.
Having read especially the last point in _Gaudium et spes_ (”we cannot but deplore…”) it seems clear that in his religious conviction, Sen. Santorum does not see evolutionary theory in contradiction with his faith. Moreover it is not necessary to introduce a less-developed idea that suggests otherwise.
August 5th, 2005 at 11:50 am
Thanks for that, Jonathon.
Here is a link: Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World: Gaudium et spes [scroll down about 1/3 of the page to see section 36.]
August 5th, 2005 at 4:54 pm
He’s also trailing in his senate reelection bid by about 14 points. Forget 2008, he’ll be lucky to make it in 2006.
September 24th, 2005 at 2:55 pm
[...] Frist backs Intelligent Design. Jeer! [...]
September 24th, 2005 at 11:03 pm
“I think Rick Santorum is fully prepared to lose to Bob Casey and he wants to do it before a national audience carrying the torch of the brand of conservatism that will nominate the next GOP candidate for president.” — This was writen by Larry Ceisler, Philly Daily New in July. I agree, a senate loss in a swing state like Pennsylvania can mean votes in the presidential primaries.
August 7th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
Good job.